Pages

Tuesday, November 15, 2016

Trump, Brexit, the New Right: A Rejection of Liberalism

In
the wake of the election of Donald Trump I had some heady conversations with
friends about what the election might mean. I think it was my way of dealing
with the heady consequences of the election. Even now when I think about what
might be in store for America, North America and the world I cannot help but
feel a sense of dread. This sense was only exaggerated by the surprise of the
outcome. If you read my piece from last week I state the possibility of a Trump
victory, but I accepted the conventional wisdom that Hillary Clinton was on her
way to victory.

Both
the direction of the election and the unexpected outcome caused many to draw
comparisons to the Brexit referendum. How do we explain the victory of Donald
Trump? Much like the Brexit vote, people who attribute the victory solely to
bigotry and ignorance are dismissing the greater picture here. There are
proximate causes which are easier to explain but these should not be conflated
with deeper, structural causes.

Let
us briefly discuss the immediate causes. Hillary Clinton was a deeply unpopular
candidate. She may have been the best known candidate to run for office who was
not already an incumbent. She had the baggage of years of experience and
conflicts. Her greater asset, experience, was also her greatest liability. Her
gender should not be dismissed; it is possible America was less ready for a
female president than suspected. Donald Trump was the Republican candidate in a
two-party system. Since he won the nomination there was, in essence, a 50%
chance that he could win. Early reporting I watched on PBS commented that Trump
was winning like a traditional Republican, which in many ways is unsurprising.
Research in Canada has suggested that negative campaigning suppresses
progressive voters more than conservative voters. After the last 18 months it
is hardly surprising that Democrats failed to turn out in some ways.

The
more I thought about Trump, Brexit and the new right in general I began to
sense a pattern - a rejection of liberalism. By liberalism I mean the classical
liberalism defined by free markets, freedom of movement/immigration, equality
and (recently) globalization. Since the 1970s and '80s Western countries have
been moving towards a more liberal version of their economies and policies.
Sometimes this has been called neo-liberalism. NAFTA and the EU are products of
this thinking as are the pro-business, low tax ideology dominant in most
countries. This school of thought expanded with the end of the Cold War. With
the defeat of Soviet-style communism it seemed that liberal economics and
liberal democracy was ready to dominate the world.

Things
have progressed down this road, but not without consequences. In the United Kingdom,
the United States of America and Canada there have been stark winners and
losers in the liberal era. If you want to know where look at the maps of the
election results; Remain and Clinton voters tend to be concentrated in places
doing well. But a new Silicon Valley is not taking root in the Rust Belt or the
Great Plains, nor in the North of England. These regions have suffered
incredibly during the period from the 1970s to present. Deindustrialization has
stripped away their economic base and wealth. I recently heard on the news that
Trump did not win the working-class demographic, but he did win the
middle-class, who feel even more vulnerable to these changes. They're the ones
with mortgages and kids in college with debt.

Many
(fairly) have accused Trump have having confused, schizophrenic policy
positions. If you look at his stances as a rejection of
liberalism/neo-liberalism the picture becomes much clearer. Trump has expressed
anti-global sentiments, both in terms of diplomacy and trade. His adoption of
America First should indicate his thinking on America's place in the world.
Trump's supporters are clearly nationalists, and perhaps white nationalists.
Subsuming nationalist impulses to international and global organizations was a
huge component to liberalism. Trump has committed to renegotiating NAFTA,
America's most important free trade agreement. NAFTA is blamed for killing
manufacturing jobs that hurt places like Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana,
and Wisconsin.

Much
like trade, open borders and immigration are components to a liberal vision of
the world. Liberals want a free flow of commerce, goods, and people. Both
Brexit and Trump arose in response to uncertainty of migration. I studied the
history of immigration in North America at Brock. The working class has often
had discomfort with new immigration and view them as their rivals. American
businesses' relationship with undocumented migrants is exploitative and the
reaction from those who have been living in declining areas is understandable.
That said, race clearly played a role in the feelings about Muslim and Mexican
immigration to the United States. In the case of Brexit race is less clear,
perhaps migration and migrants would be more accurate.

Anti-equity
is a harder trait to pinpoint. Obviously we could look at treatment of
non-whites as evidence, or Trump's comments about women as evidence. Questions
of equity have always been controversial in the United States. Policies
designed to address inequity are highly controversial, i.e. effective school
segregation, affirmative action, criminal justice reform.

Anti-liberalism
is not unique to Donald Trump and the Republicans. One could argue that the
appeal of Bernie Sanders is a product of anti-liberalism, just from the other
side. Socialism is not extra liberalism, in many ways it is anti-liberalism.

Looking
around the world at the rise of new right parties, the results of Brexit and
election of Donald Trump it is not too far of a leap to think that the global
movement towards liberals from the 1970s/90s is facing a backlash. Evidence has
existed for years, such as the rise of China's state capitalism and Russia's
backslide away from liberal democracy. The scary thing is that anti-liberalism
on the right is sometimes known as fascism. The last time there was a global
rejection of liberal economics and liberal democracy was the 1920s-40s. I want
to be clear, I am not saying we are short years away from a world war.
Beginning in the 20th century we have transitioned from periods of openness and
closeness on the global stage. The early 20th century was quite open, and then
the rise of socialism/communism and the Second World War and Cold War led to a
closing, until the 1970s. Perhaps we are entering a world when things are
closing. That said, new technologies likely means that things will never close
again as much as they have in the past.

Liberalism
has left many people behind, and it is not unthinkable that these anti-liberal
movements could find a place in Canada. I think this is one of the few ways to
make sense of some recent trends. Do not accept overly simplistic explanations
of election, we are motivated by complicated factors as voters. Perhaps winds
of change are blowing and who knows where it will take us.